↓ Skip to main content

Attentional and affective consequences of technology supported mindfulness training: a randomised, active control, efficacy trial

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Psychology, November 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#43 of 866)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (96th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (85th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
7 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
twitter
9 X users
video
1 YouTube creator

Citations

dimensions_citation
90 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
336 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Attentional and affective consequences of technology supported mindfulness training: a randomised, active control, efficacy trial
Published in
BMC Psychology, November 2016
DOI 10.1186/s40359-016-0168-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sheffy Bhayee, Patricia Tomaszewski, Daniel H. Lee, Graeme Moffat, Lou Pino, Sylvain Moreno, Norman A. S. Farb

Abstract

Mindfulness training (MT) programs represent an approach to attention training with well-validated mental health benefits. However, research supporting MT efficacy is based predominantly on weekly-meeting, facilitator-led, group-intervention formats. It is unknown whether participants might benefit from neurofeedback-assisted, technology-supported MT (N-tsMT), in which meditation is delivered individually, without the need for a facilitator, travel to a training site, or the presence of a supportive group environment. Mirroring the validation of group MT interventions, the first step in addressing this question requires identifying whether N-tsMT promotes measurable benefits. Here, we report on an initial investigation of a commercial N-tsMT system. In a randomized, active control trial, community-dwelling healthy adult participants carried out 6 weeks of daily practice, receiving either N-tsMT (n = 13), or a control condition of daily online math training (n = 13). Training effects were assessed on target measures of attention and well-being. Participants also completed daily post-training surveys assessing effects on mood, body awareness, calm, effort, and stress. Analysis revealed training effects specific to N-tsMT, with attentional improvements in overall reaction time on a Stroop task, and well-being improvements via reduced somatic symptoms on the Brief Symptom Inventory. Attention and well-being improvements were correlated, and effects were greatest for the most neurotic participants. However, secondary, exploratory measures of attention and well-being did not show training-specific effects. N-tsMT was associated with greater body awareness and calm, and initially greater effort that later converged with effort in the control condition. Preliminary findings indicate that N-tsMT promotes modest benefits for attention and subjective well-being in a healthy community sample relative to an active control condition. However, the findings would benefit from replication in a larger sample, and more intensive practice or more comprehensive MT instruction might be required to promote the broader benefits typically reported in group format, facilitated MT. Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN43629398 . Retrospectively registered on June 16, 2016.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 336 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 334 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 57 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 42 13%
Researcher 40 12%
Student > Bachelor 36 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 23 7%
Other 63 19%
Unknown 75 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 105 31%
Medicine and Dentistry 27 8%
Neuroscience 27 8%
Engineering 15 4%
Computer Science 14 4%
Other 61 18%
Unknown 87 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 62. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 02 November 2021.
All research outputs
#627,370
of 23,881,329 outputs
Outputs from BMC Psychology
#43
of 866 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#13,876
of 421,512 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Psychology
#3
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,881,329 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 866 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 421,512 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.